Heh, and the intro shows off French reserve APCR. Reminder that there are still mid tier tanks that have stock APCR, like the German M41 Bulldog, the T92, M56 Scorpion, and all 90mm M48s.
@@IanChunck yeah they get hit by sharpnel but just turn orange, imagine in real life you get hit by 600m/s flying metal chunk, its an immediate major injury, out of action situation if not death
APCR and HESH both suffer from same issue which is that the crew members in game are the most stoic gigachads ever who dont care if their tank got penetrated and some of them even got "knocked out". They'll just keep operating no matter what. While in real life getting even a small amount of supersonic metal fragments flying around from APCR or the same fragments plus the smack of kilograms of explosives right on the hull of your tank is gonna cause a *significant emotional event* and reduce their ability to act in the moment.
@salzmun999 I'm saying APCR needs some buffs. Most likely just massive flat pen increases. Theyve once already nerfed flat pen on some APCR (I think it was the US 76 or 90mm APCR that they nerfed from its historical pen or just never gave it that pen). Its fine if they suck in angled performance since its supposed to be historical.
@@marte9346 That and I think tank crews are trained to shoot until the enemy changes shape or is a ball of fire. But they dont always have to worry about getting shot back after the first succesful hit unlike in War Thunder.
BRL designed and tested short rod APFSDS, long rod APFSDS and HEATFS as early as 1948-1950 (no exact date given). They were based on data collected on kinetic energy projectiles researched by Germany late in the war. The "asset" used for most tests was nothing less than a T30 heavy tank, which we got footage firing the 2 piece short rod APFSDS at the BRL facility on Aberdeen.
It's also quite difficult to simulate the crew getting their limbs or torso filled with shrapnels from APCR and their emotional response to it instead of WT crew where they just thug it out
I laughed, but in fairness, HP is probably the best way of measuring something's health or durability (and the mechanic is derived from historical officers' wargames); the way War Thunder does it, with each separate component on the tank having its own health bar, is the best one around for a reason. The crew members are too tanky, though.
@ The fact that crews can repair a tank that would be out of combat, makes it worse than a simple HP bar. It's laughable that a 120mm AP round can wipe out the entire turret crew and destroy the gun, yet the tank is still a threat after 30-60s.
It's mostly realistic (angled pen could maybe be slightly better but should still be bad), the issue is that in real combat crews would probably bail after the first penetration or two, while in-game you just keep fighting until you're down to one crew or your ammo explodes.
Hello Zenturion, in the last time i have played endurance naval battles and tried to kill some ships with torpedos/bombs... but i see some plane has "magnetic mines"; since Gaijin added them in the game i remember that they buffed and change some mechanisms about Magnetic mines. So it would be great a video about an accurate description of this type of armaments, here some tips: (MAGNETIC MINES = MM) - Difference between sea mine vs MM - Are MM really "magnetic"? -Range of trigger -time it's stand active -Can i predict the direction of a ship, drop a MM forward a battleship and make them blow up much easier the ship, or better a direct hit from bombs? Ty for the patience.
APCR is a good backup round to bring on most tanks. It lets the 75 Sherman go through most heavy tanks they'll encounter, it lets the M47 punch a Maus in the face, and it has a high enough velocity to make long range shots on moving targets a lot easier. It's not going to one shot most things unless you hit the ammo directly, but it can absolutely level the playing field against a much heavier opponent.
I remember a few years ago when apcr would literally bounce off everything and the few instances it would pen, it would do absolutely jack in terms of damage. I think that was before France was introduced to the game.
I assume it relates to the size, length, weight and even material of the penetrator rod. APCR has a small and light penetrator than APDS, which uses a sabot to carry a larger rod. Then of course we get APFSDS which has a longer, heavier rod ("dart") that also has stronger material, so the most spalling occurs. And higher penetration values. However, I have seen comments from real-life tankers that stated APCR in real life was far more effective on targets than this game portrays.
APCR is only viable in some tanks like Sherman Jumbo because the gun is terrible at penetrating most targets. Even with the Jumbo, the M61 APHE should be your main shell.
apcr is useless because it can only reliably penetrate flat armor, but if the armr is flat chances are any of your other shells can also go through it so you wouldn't need it anyway. the only exception I can think of off the top of my head is things like the american 90mm vs the maus because the maus' armor is physically so thick that even flat spots usually cn't be penetrated by standard AP shells. basically T32s vs Maus, it is still unrelaible at range because of the Maus's turret front being rounded so if you hit off center it just doesnt pen, but at least the T32 has the possibility of penetration. Only other example I can think of is the M26 vs the Tiger 2 turret front
They could honestly just buff the minimum spall. I haven't touched war thunder in a long time. I seem to remember that apcr also had its chances of detonating ammo lowered. Does the spalling of APCR get handled the same way as other ammunition, meaning just the main projectile has a low chance of detonating? Again it's been a long time so I can't remember, but it always seemed like APCR and APDS had hard times detonating ammo. APFSDS doesn't have that because I assumed they modeled the pyrophoric property of depleted uranium.
@@o-hogameplay185 In this case it's at least partly correct. Copy-Pasted from my response in one of the other comments: To my knowledge, the main APCR penetration nerf is because Gaijin decided to run the penetration chart through a calculator rather than using historical documents. Normally this wouldn't be much of a problem, except that they based this calculation off of Russian APCR, which tends to have smaller cores made of steel instead of tungsten (or similar), resulting in a significant reduction in performance; they then applied this calculation, based on subpar Russian APCRs, to ALL APCRs in the game. I believe something similar, or possibly the same incident, also affects APDS.
@@wolfgangkolber381 APCR performs badly irl too, so idk, maybe. the APDS is not the case. it has 3 gens, and they differ vastly. the only APDS that is bad are the gen 1 ones, they are basically useless, but gen 2 and especially gen 3 are very good
Considering this is the shell you HAVE to use to be anywhere near competitive at 6.7 with any of the M26 Pershings, yeah theres a VERY good reason why I skip those tanks in the TT.
I remember pre-nerf APCR, it was a thing of beauty and borderline OP at times, they really need to un-nerf it at least a little tho, it's basically useless at the moment
Used to be amazing back then. Instead of limiting the amount you can bring, Gaijin double nerfed both its angled performance and spalling. Also it shatters so much especially when you contact anything before the actual armor. This includes wood, tracks and lightly thin plates. The M26's 90 mm APCR T33 round was documented to "The shot will defeat all plates of the German Pz Kpfw V "Panther" Tank except the gun mantlet. IT WILL PENETRATE THE GLACIS PLATE OF THE "PANTHER" TANK UP TO 1,100 YARDS RANGE." Was tested and did perform as intended. In game it does not penetrate. EDIT: Actually maybe confusing it with how the M26 APCBC round should penetrate the UFP of a Panther based on tests. Can't post a link but detailed graphs from "Terminal Ballistics Data Volume III", states it was able to go through ~80ish mm of US steel angled at the time at a range of 1 kilometer. In game it doesn't even penetrate the Panther's UFP in
APCR used to be the meta shell shortly after the beta. APHE was not yet a nuke and had actual downsides, APCR did far more and realistic spalling (spalling of all AP shells was roughly alomng the lines of real world testing averages) and it had realistic angle penetration even accounting for "shell shattering" of early APCR (yes there was no shell shatter, but you could simply let the riccoche chance roll twice and have the same effect). Then Gaijin decided that APCR Meta was boring and harmful, so they buffed APHE to be a nuke and nerfed the flat pen of all APCR by around 10%, reduced the angle pen by 30-60% and introduced proper shell shattering but failed to have that only affect certain APCR. Oh they also increased the riccoche chance at lower angles and significantly lowered the angle for the 100% chance. German APCR in the Pz IV went from "I can upperfrontplate a T34 at 1km (except for drivers port because reasons) and kill all his crew" to "mommy help me the armour plate sits at 89° so I can not pen it" (first example is real, second is ofcourse just for effect) Somehow the most common anti tank shell used on the eastern front for tank to tank warfare is useless in game, and most soviet tanks of the are do not even have their APCR shells
That could depend on overmatch mechanics, which make the AoA less important when the caliber of the shell is larger than the thickness of the plate in the first place.
isnt it funny how 3 types of Shells that Russia doesn't use are so tragic, yet one type that is very common in their entire tech tree even at top tier is so overpowered? Coincidence
probably because it's not really worth it. If you look at the animation when you hover over the ammo, you'll see that only a small piece of the APCR actually penetrates the enemy armor. This is because APCR has a small but incredibly dense core usually made of tungsten, with the rest of the shot being made of a weaker metal that the core punches through on contact with something. The actual part that penetrates is so small you probably can't even fit enough explosive to break the shell apart like normal APHE, and what little explosive you can somehow put into a solid piece of tungsten will also reduce the armor penetration since it is so much lighter.
@ Yhea it’s a bad shell but in real life it’s really good but in war thunder is shit the stock round on the m48 tanks and t92 are sh!t sometimes I use apcr for heavely armored tanks but it rare that I use apcr
apcr ammunition is half the size of the bore of the gun, putting explosive filler in the middle would reduce the overall mass of the ammunition which will drastically decreases the chance of it actually penetrating. At that point. you're better off using a standard APHE shell.
Will APCR is underpowered, APHE is overpowered, why ? Cause russians used rarely APCR, but used alot of APHE shells with goof angeling performance and alot of explosive filler. And when gaijin finally kneeled and was about to make APHE not only more balanced, but also more realistic, the community voted against it. This community is filled with peopel who are just as stupid and russian biased as gaijin themselfs. Thats also why the game has overpressure mechanics, but no proper armor/hull degredation.
The round offers nothing, angle performance is utter trash, spall doesnt exist, shell isnt tremendously fast and for is only usable in certain situations
@@mirekspodmonopolowego9016 Ye for the sake of balance I think we should throw away a little realism Swear to god apcr and solid shot ap should have a little more spall. But not too much to make em op. Just enough for them to be a bit more competitive with aphe
APHE irl is worse than regular APCBC for AT purposes, yet in game APHE reigns supreme in the AT role. This just goes to point out how Gaijin tweaks some stuff here and there for gameplay 'balance'. What's stopping them from doing the same with APCR? I mean, it already has really bad angle performance (which is realistic) so why can't they just give it a bit more spall (which is arguably a 'realistic' change too, since APCR had way more spalling irl. Hence why it was a sought-after round for AT guns during WW2)?
*Direct hit
*Yellow loader
Nein, it phases through without any dmg
It penetrates the gunners head
*yellow
Shell Shatter: Allow me to introduce myself
I have no problem with spalling, it's the penetration angle since it can't pen anything that isn't flat
try to pen tracks on top of armor plate
Heh, and the intro shows off French reserve APCR.
Reminder that there are still mid tier tanks that have stock APCR, like the German M41 Bulldog, the T92, M56 Scorpion, and all 90mm M48s.
The stock m48s and such made me hate my life when I was grinding them
t92 apcr made me go insane
theres no way that thing could pen maus right? Zenturion must have modified the files, pls tell me he did
Yeah, that's how he had APCR shells that were the same, but had different weights
@ Yes, he did.
Stock grind with this shell is painful.
Average britain
And some american light tanks@@DOIRAC
@@keremyalcinkaya1805And anything like m60 which starts with it like the m48a2 c from germany
The stock m48 is painful to grind.
Pt-76 moment
Man who just has the tungsten core of a 75mm APCR round go through his chest "Well, I got better"
"Tis but a flesh wound"
using APCR is 95% shell shattered 4.9% no post pen damage and 0.1% actually damaging crew, ammo etc.
And they just turn orange
@@IanChunck yeah they get hit by sharpnel but just turn orange, imagine in real life you get hit by 600m/s flying metal chunk, its an immediate major injury, out of action situation if not death
APCR and HESH both suffer from same issue which is that the crew members in game are the most stoic gigachads ever who dont care if their tank got penetrated and some of them even got "knocked out". They'll just keep operating no matter what. While in real life getting even a small amount of supersonic metal fragments flying around from APCR or the same fragments plus the smack of kilograms of explosives right on the hull of your tank is gonna cause a *significant emotional event* and reduce their ability to act in the moment.
So you are saying we need *emotional Damage* ?
that coupled with the fact that irl you can't be sure the thing that penned your tank didn't hit the ammo or that the ammo is not about to cook off.
@salzmun999 I'm saying APCR needs some buffs. Most likely just massive flat pen increases. Theyve once already nerfed flat pen on some APCR (I think it was the US 76 or 90mm APCR that they nerfed from its historical pen or just never gave it that pen). Its fine if they suck in angled performance since its supposed to be historical.
@@marte9346 That and I think tank crews are trained to shoot until the enemy changes shape or is a ball of fire. But they dont always have to worry about getting shot back after the first succesful hit unlike in War Thunder.
This reminds me of when gaijin tried to add the stun affect, and I do not want that in game.
The real issue is the dogshit performance vs angled armour.
APCR is like a snowball that can somehow pierce 300mm of armor
0:38 That is incorrect. It is affected by the core mass, which is not visible on the stat card. Not the overall mass. As far as i know.
rising the projectile mass itself most probably also impacts the core/penetrator mass, so it still shows effects
@@nairdas_hobbies Yeah, tho i think i also remember wrong, it was called Damage caliber, the diameter of the core is the most imporant iirc.
T30 has APCR IRL.
Can we push for 155mm APCR?
Would finally make it easy to fight
It was used to test a prototype sabot round
BRL designed and tested short rod APFSDS, long rod APFSDS and HEATFS as early as 1948-1950 (no exact date given). They were based on data collected on kinetic energy projectiles researched by Germany late in the war. The "asset" used for most tests was nothing less than a T30 heavy tank, which we got footage firing the 2 piece short rod APFSDS at the BRL facility on Aberdeen.
It's also quite difficult to simulate the crew getting their limbs or torso filled with shrapnels from APCR and their emotional response to it instead of WT crew where they just thug it out
no german users :
me with 17 APCR and 4 HE loaded in the T26E5 :
Me when 90mm APCR goes hard:
US 90mm and 105mm APCR are my favorite high pen rounds lol
@ yup T15E2 APCR pens better than the M348 (332 mm)
Gaijin: we have realistic damage models(and not HP)
meanwhile the models itself: HP with RNG added to it
Did you even watch the video?
@@hunlepto2239 No
Gaijin: We don't have a HP bar! We have many HP bars that you can magically replenish by repairing for 30 seconds.
I laughed, but in fairness, HP is probably the best way of measuring something's health or durability (and the mechanic is derived from historical officers' wargames); the way War Thunder does it, with each separate component on the tank having its own health bar, is the best one around for a reason. The crew members are too tanky, though.
@ The fact that crews can repair a tank that would be out of combat, makes it worse than a simple HP bar. It's laughable that a 120mm AP round can wipe out the entire turret crew and destroy the gun, yet the tank is still a threat after 30-60s.
there's also seems to be a behavior that it doesn't ignite vehicle parts (like ammo and fuel tanks)
It's mostly realistic (angled pen could maybe be slightly better but should still be bad), the issue is that in real combat crews would probably bail after the first penetration or two, while in-game you just keep fighting until you're down to one crew or your ammo explodes.
Hello Zenturion, in the last time i have played endurance naval battles and tried to kill some ships with torpedos/bombs... but i see some plane has "magnetic mines"; since Gaijin added them in the game i remember that they buffed and change some mechanisms about Magnetic mines. So it would be great a video about an accurate description of this type of armaments, here some tips:
(MAGNETIC MINES = MM)
- Difference between sea mine vs MM
- Are MM really "magnetic"?
-Range of trigger
-time it's stand active
-Can i predict the direction of a ship, drop a MM forward a battleship and make them blow up much easier the ship, or better a direct hit from bombs?
Ty for the patience.
APCR is a good backup round to bring on most tanks. It lets the 75 Sherman go through most heavy tanks they'll encounter, it lets the M47 punch a Maus in the face, and it has a high enough velocity to make long range shots on moving targets a lot easier. It's not going to one shot most things unless you hit the ammo directly, but it can absolutely level the playing field against a much heavier opponent.
Fragment generation based on projectile mass is wild. It should more be based on caliber or penetrator material (tungsten vs steel)
Honestly, I fondly remember this shell type blowing up ammo much more consistently than Full AP
I remember a few years ago when apcr would literally bounce off everything and the few instances it would pen, it would do absolutely jack in terms of damage. I think that was before France was introduced to the game.
I assume it relates to the size, length, weight and even material of the penetrator rod. APCR has a small and light penetrator than APDS, which uses a sabot to carry a larger rod. Then of course we get APFSDS which has a longer, heavier rod ("dart") that also has stronger material, so the most spalling occurs. And higher penetration values. However, I have seen comments from real-life tankers that stated APCR in real life was far more effective on targets than this game portrays.
I remember when the JPZ 4-5 had stock APCR. What an awful time to be grinding at that time lol
Also APCR is susceptible to ricochet, so angling/angled plates are even more effective against this projectile.
APCR is only viable in some tanks like Sherman Jumbo because the gun is terrible at penetrating most targets. Even with the Jumbo, the M61 APHE should be your main shell.
War thunder player: i hate apcr
World of tanks: i love apcr
apcr is useless because it can only reliably penetrate flat armor, but if the armr is flat chances are any of your other shells can also go through it so you wouldn't need it anyway. the only exception I can think of off the top of my head is things like the american 90mm vs the maus because the maus' armor is physically so thick that even flat spots usually cn't be penetrated by standard AP shells. basically T32s vs Maus, it is still unrelaible at range because of the Maus's turret front being rounded so if you hit off center it just doesnt pen, but at least the T32 has the possibility of penetration. Only other example I can think of is the M26 vs the Tiger 2 turret front
The same happens to the T-50's 45mm
It faces tanks that the normal APHE can't defeat, so APCR it is
They could honestly just buff the minimum spall. I haven't touched war thunder in a long time. I seem to remember that apcr also had its chances of detonating ammo lowered. Does the spalling of APCR get handled the same way as other ammunition, meaning just the main projectile has a low chance of detonating? Again it's been a long time so I can't remember, but it always seemed like APCR and APDS had hard times detonating ammo. APFSDS doesn't have that because I assumed they modeled the pyrophoric property of depleted uranium.
It isn’t used by the USSR much, so of course it’s bad
get your conspiracy out of this
@@o-hogameplay185 In this case it's at least partly correct.
Copy-Pasted from my response in one of the other comments: To my knowledge, the main APCR penetration nerf is because Gaijin decided to run the penetration chart through a calculator rather than using historical documents. Normally this wouldn't be much of a problem, except that they based this calculation off of Russian APCR, which tends to have smaller cores made of steel instead of tungsten (or similar), resulting in a significant reduction in performance; they then applied this calculation, based on subpar Russian APCRs, to ALL APCRs in the game. I believe something similar, or possibly the same incident, also affects APDS.
@@wolfgangkolber381
APCR performs badly irl too, so idk, maybe.
the APDS is not the case. it has 3 gens, and they differ vastly.
the only APDS that is bad are the gen 1 ones, they are basically useless, but gen 2 and especially gen 3 are very good
Can we please talk about the H.35 upper-front-plating a dman MAUS???
Theres also the fact that APCR uses tungsten that doesn't shatter after penetration
Thank you for mathematically explaining how to better use this shell.
This is why American APCR was so effective in WW2, the actual penetrator made up half of the weight if the shell.
the Tiger 10.5cm's APCR is pretty effective
Hmmm ah yes i love using APCR for it to do ZERO damage,or just shell shatter on a 1 degree plate
125mm APCR about to turn a whole crew into salad
건담게임에서 듣던 익숙한 BGM
Considering this is the shell you HAVE to use to be anywhere near competitive at 6.7 with any of the M26 Pershings, yeah theres a VERY good reason why I skip those tanks in the TT.
대구경 경심은 파편이 쓸만한 수준으로 나오기는 하죠
APCR is great against Panzer1,2,3,4 and Tiger 1. That's it.
And so is literally anything with more then 100mm of flat pen.
Grinding magach-1 to get the HEAT was a curse sent by god, having only APCR as a starter
M48 apcr is actually somewhat decent, because it is quite heavy, you can even pen stuff like T-54 in hull when standing above them.
my brain just can't take in an APCR penning the upper plate of the Maus. i know it has modified stats, but still
But APHE gets to defy the laws of physics.
I remember pre-nerf APCR, it was a thing of beauty and borderline OP at times, they really need to un-nerf it at least a little tho, it's basically useless at the moment
Used to be amazing back then. Instead of limiting the amount you can bring, Gaijin double nerfed both its angled performance and spalling. Also it shatters so much especially when you contact anything before the actual armor. This includes wood, tracks and lightly thin plates.
The M26's 90 mm APCR T33 round was documented to "The shot will defeat all plates of the German Pz Kpfw V "Panther" Tank except the gun mantlet. IT WILL PENETRATE THE GLACIS PLATE OF THE "PANTHER" TANK UP TO 1,100 YARDS RANGE." Was tested and did perform as intended. In game it does not penetrate.
EDIT: Actually maybe confusing it with how the M26 APCBC round should penetrate the UFP of a Panther based on tests. Can't post a link but detailed graphs from "Terminal Ballistics Data Volume III", states it was able to go through ~80ish mm of US steel angled at the time at a range of 1 kilometer. In game it doesn't even penetrate the Panther's UFP in
APCR used to be the meta shell shortly after the beta. APHE was not yet a nuke and had actual downsides, APCR did far more and realistic spalling (spalling of all AP shells was roughly alomng the lines of real world testing averages) and it had realistic angle penetration even accounting for "shell shattering" of early APCR (yes there was no shell shatter, but you could simply let the riccoche chance roll twice and have the same effect). Then Gaijin decided that APCR Meta was boring and harmful, so they buffed APHE to be a nuke and nerfed the flat pen of all APCR by around 10%, reduced the angle pen by 30-60% and introduced proper shell shattering but failed to have that only affect certain APCR. Oh they also increased the riccoche chance at lower angles and significantly lowered the angle for the 100% chance.
German APCR in the Pz IV went from "I can upperfrontplate a T34 at 1km (except for drivers port because reasons) and kill all his crew" to "mommy help me the armour plate sits at 89° so I can not pen it" (first example is real, second is ofcourse just for effect)
Somehow the most common anti tank shell used on the eastern front for tank to tank warfare is useless in game, and most soviet tanks of the are do not even have their APCR shells
APCR stock grind should be considered a crime against humanity
make the spalling ricochet inside for solid shots
Wtf, isnt this bgm from sd Gundam g generation overworld?
I wanted to make an APCR with explosives please 🥺
what background mosik does dis guiy use
Does ACPR really pen bad against angled armor? I have felt that heavy shells pen more easily compared to lighter shells.
That could depend on overmatch mechanics, which make the AoA less important when the caliber of the shell is larger than the thickness of the plate in the first place.
if you watch simulations about it - yes, it is very much terrible against angled armor irl. not as bad as in game, but still bad
The only APCR I've used that wasn't utterly terrible was M304 Shot on the 90mm M3
Remember stock apcr with no parts or fpe either. Good times.
Apcr and apds... put a ballistic cap to compensate penetration angle... 😁
thats probably why American Hvap feels so much stronger then everyone else.
"shell shattered"
isnt it funny how 3 types of Shells that Russia doesn't use are so tragic, yet one type that is very common in their entire tech tree even at top tier is so overpowered? Coincidence
The WW2 100mm APCR is literally worse than the stock 100mm APHE in the game. lol
Could I maybe ask how you make these like test maps?
0:16
should be the opposite, as with more angle there is more material 🤷
APCR is a last line of offence.
I’ve used it against lightly armored vehicles and it’s decent but against tanks it’s useless
snuck up on a panther, was unfortunately in a stock PT-76 and ended up dying because of that shitty apcr doing no damage
So apcr are lightweight ap shell then
Why is APCR Bad
Simple answer
*Yes*
Am I the only one that does really well with APCR?
APCR was actually good back in the day. But Gaijin nerfed it into oblivion.
make no explosive hesh
Hesh does explosive damage? As a HESH user, first time hearing about it. It usually does "hit" or kills one dude only.
@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 hitting panther mantlet with 183mm HESH(21kg TNT): HIT!🗣
Still better and more reliable than HEAT
*shell shattered*
Why apcr with he don’t exist if apcr has aphe the name should apcrhe
probably because it's not really worth it. If you look at the animation when you hover over the ammo, you'll see that only a small piece of the APCR actually penetrates the enemy armor. This is because APCR has a small but incredibly dense core usually made of tungsten, with the rest of the shot being made of a weaker metal that the core punches through on contact with something. The actual part that penetrates is so small you probably can't even fit enough explosive to break the shell apart like normal APHE, and what little explosive you can somehow put into a solid piece of tungsten will also reduce the armor penetration since it is so much lighter.
@ Yhea it’s a bad shell but in real life it’s really good but in war thunder is shit the stock round on the m48 tanks and t92 are sh!t sometimes I use apcr for heavely armored tanks but it rare that I use apcr
apcr ammunition is half the size of the bore of the gun, putting explosive filler in the middle would reduce the overall mass of the ammunition which will drastically decreases the chance of it actually penetrating. At that point. you're better off using a standard APHE shell.
Average m 48 experiance
그래서 미국 90밀 apcr이 좋은거구나..
aubl 74 hvg moment
Will APCR is underpowered, APHE is overpowered, why ? Cause russians used rarely APCR, but used alot of APHE shells with goof angeling performance and alot of explosive filler. And when gaijin finally kneeled and was about to make APHE not only more balanced, but also more realistic, the community voted against it. This community is filled with peopel who are just as stupid and russian biased as gaijin themselfs.
Thats also why the game has overpressure mechanics, but no proper armor/hull degredation.
shit damage, shell shatters and terrible angle pen. what else do you need?
The round offers nothing, angle performance is utter trash, spall doesnt exist, shell isnt tremendously fast and for is only usable in certain situations
Whats spalling?
idk, i main britain
hull fragments from the shell hitting the hull
basically metal from the armor breaking off of the armor turning into shrapnel inside of the tank due to the impact of the anti-tank round.
@@HiraethWTM Love you content man!
YOOO i watch ur videos :) @@HiraethWTM
10 kg apcr is just ap 😂
apcr
the hole game is bad these days
Yes, almost as bad as APDS..
APDS is better in every way. In no situation is APCR better, and you are genuinely tripping if you think otherwise.
APDS is very good if you use gen 2 or gen 3. gen 1 apds is almost as useless as apcr
Because it's realistic ?
This game is not super realistic anyways, imo sacrificing realism for gameplay is valid here, both solid shot and apcr should be buffed.
@@mirekspodmonopolowego9016
Ye for the sake of balance I think we should throw away a little realism
Swear to god apcr and solid shot ap should have a little more spall. But not too much to make em op. Just enough for them to be a bit more competitive with aphe
"muh realism" mfs when I tell them you don't drive tanks irl using a keyboard
APHE irl is worse than regular APCBC for AT purposes, yet in game APHE reigns supreme in the AT role. This just goes to point out how Gaijin tweaks some stuff here and there for gameplay 'balance'. What's stopping them from doing the same with APCR? I mean, it already has really bad angle performance (which is realistic) so why can't they just give it a bit more spall (which is arguably a 'realistic' change too, since APCR had way more spalling irl. Hence why it was a sought-after round for AT guns during WW2)?
@@mirekspodmonopolowego9016 funny enough the cHEAT-FS are supposed to generated sh*t amount of spall like flame instead of A+ annoy tool